Alpha +3

Link up A&A Pacific 1940 and Europe 1940, and you've got Axis & Allies Global 1940.
User avatar
Imperious leader
Posts: 5207
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:04 am
Location: Moving up to phase line red...

Re: Alpha +3

Post by Imperious leader » Mon Oct 03, 2011 2:22 pm

Yea don't change the turn order unless you do:

Soviet Union/ China
Axis
Allies

If you mess with turn order the setup will discover more problems than we had before. I'm not "messing" with anything and resent your choice of words.

Perhaps:

Germany
France
Soviet Union
Italy
ANZAC- CHINA
Japan
UK
USA


Hey IL... Let me put this to you as gently as I can... Stop pushing the "Italy before the UK" nonsense will you please. This issue has been explored and rejected - as you very well know. If your intent is to undermine these efforts I will not tolerate it.
We really need an Axis and Allies World War one game so i can play that on August 1st, 2014.

Noll
Posts: 331
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:41 am

Re: Alpha +3

Post by Noll » Mon Oct 03, 2011 2:33 pm

Noll wrote:
Infrastructure wrote:Larry,

I think you should pull the trigger on the UK bomber. How serious is this new Italian turn order? I do like the thought of breaking up the allied megaturn. A LOT of changes to the map to test though. SHould we be brainstorming this, or is it too much.

Working on several setup changes one of which is the UK bomber. It will probably happen.
Decided to beef up Germany a bit more.

The Italian turn order change will most likely not happen. I do see a turn order change occurring, however. It might look something like this... Germany Soviet Union Japan UK ANZAC Italy France China US.

I'm adjusting some NOs
Looking into the Victory Conditions 7w/Mos or 8wo/Mos

The BIG issues still remain to be the Mediterranean situation
SBRs and Convoy Disruption systems

Hey Larry! Be careful with turn order, if UK/Anzac goes before USA, they can act as can opener in the Pacific, like ti was in OOB. UK can also act as a can opener in the Atlantic.


Other than this, I like your new proposed setup change so far!

Are you telling me you'd prefer: Germany Soviet Union Japan US ANZAC Italy France China UK?

Anzac could serve the same purpose as can opener in the Pacific.

Unfortunately UK should go before Italy with the current setup and with your idea of the game, 'cause if you move Italy prior the UK there will be tons of change needed as you already pointed out.

So the turn order should stay the same, unless you really want to move Italy prior the Uk, in wich case I would see the turn order like this:

Germany
Soviet Union
Japan
US
China
Italy
Uk
Anzac
France


It's important that the US plays Before UK and Anzac in my opinion, otherwise the Pacific part of the game will suffer a lot. Ok... I think you may be on to something here. So again I ask... Are you telling me you'd prefer: Germany Soviet Union Japan US ANZAC Italy France China UK?

Noll
Posts: 331
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:41 am

Re: Alpha +3

Post by Noll » Mon Oct 03, 2011 2:42 pm

I was editing but you were faster :)

Yeah I love that turn order from a playtime perspective Larry!

m7574
Posts: 352
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 11:37 pm

Re: Alpha +3

Post by m7574 » Mon Oct 03, 2011 2:50 pm

Wow Larry. I did not know the Germans to be so under-powered. I like that the extra armor units will help Germany crush France. But in this event I would like to see Russia get equal additions too. Tell me... why would I give one side more units and then do the same to the other? I have concluded that Germany needs a boost. More pressure has to placed on Russia for a more interesting game IMO.

If Normandy loses a UK ftr, and the UK has one less ftr to scramble G1, and Germany does not need any aircraft in the G1 blitzkrieg, can they now eliminate both BB's and the CA's in the North Sea/Channel? I say yes. Most likely - yes. Of course nothing is for sure with dice determining the outcomes.

USA's NO moved from France to Normandy/Low Countries is a good call. Frankly, it might be too easy. I'm keeping an eye on this one.

No airbase for Gibraltar? This eliminates the UK's ability to muster in sz92. If you make it undesirable for the UK to attack Italy on UK1, either by turn order or set up changes, what options have the UK got left? Too many to list.

I like that facilities have a max of 3 AA shots. Tactical AA's may support the IC, I assume? No.... That would in fact be a false assumption. I didn't say anything about that.

DEI NO removed for UK is fine too.

Malta airbase gone? Minor influence but makes malta about as insignificant as sicily now. Disagree... It still has a naval base.

New Airbase in Quebec is historical and functions to help the allies hunt down subs and get back to UK quickly. This one is probably over-due. Yeah... I agree.

It feels like we are over-reacting to the percieved allied advantage in G40. I don't think there's any "over-reactions" going on.

User avatar
Infrastructure
Posts: 312
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 11:29 am

Re: Alpha +3

Post by Infrastructure » Mon Oct 03, 2011 2:57 pm

Larry, push the magic button that makes everyone happy. It's that simple.

For weeks everybody ( I thought) was complaining about SBR not being conducted because it was not cost effective. And now you're telling me that these adjustments won't work unless you can choose what your shooting at and interceptors hitting bomber first. In any case Germany has two major ICs and probably will capture 3 minors in France. If the US can shut them down... they deserves to win.

You are right, but shouldn't a nation have the right to "upgrade their facility aa?" If you can prepare your land army with multiple anti-air, you should be able to do it for your industry / fixed placements? Another thought is that perhaps the presence of an interceptor could remove the +2? :D rather creative! Being able to upgrade a facility... and/or having interceptors remove the +2s. Look... this is how "mission creep" starts. Let's leave it as it is.

How much time do we have to explore a new turn order? The first new one you proposed has a lot of plusses in that it breaks up the allied megaturn, but we should look at the impact on the pacific of ANZAC taking an island and the US fortifying it. I feel Alpha 3 already weakened Japan slightly, because now Russia can decalre war on them and help defend china and not lose the mongolian bonus. No they can't... If Russia attack Japan the Mongols remain neutral. Of course Russia is going to have a s-ton do deal with now with a stronger Germany!!!

Not saying bad, just saying, do we have time to test? I'm barely through 4th and 3rd rounds in 4 games and will have limited time moving forward. What should we focus on? You'll have to make that call. FYI... I like Noll's proposal better than mine. He reminded me about the UK/US can opener issue and thus the turn order might be better if is: Germany Soviet Union Japan US ANZAC Italy France China UK? To stop some possible confusion on this turn order I will be going back and editing my earlier turn order post to read like this one. By the way... I should point out that this turn order effort is really in flux and could end up being changed even again, but for the moment it's: Germany Soviet Union Japan US ANZAC Italy France China UK?

User avatar
Infrastructure
Posts: 312
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 11:29 am

Re: Alpha +3

Post by Infrastructure » Mon Oct 03, 2011 3:02 pm

The BIG issues still remain to be the Mediterranean situation
SBRs and Convoy Disruption systems


Also,
Just noticed this. Is the new convoy system still being conidered? Say it is sooo!

That system has too many issues as it was presented. I'm still working on it.

User avatar
Kobu
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:27 am

Re: Alpha +3

Post by Kobu » Mon Oct 03, 2011 3:07 pm

Larry wrote:Hey Kaufschtick:
You might want to read this and try some of it out.

New Turn Order
Germany Soviet Union Japan UK ANZAC Italy France China US.
This definitely brings back the can opener troubles in the Pacific. Larry, what about my proposal:

Germany
Soviet Union
Japan
US
China
Italy
UK
ANZAC
France

No can opener troubles, and at most we have a 3 turn block of UK/ANZAC/France which isn't a bad thing.

I'm thinking that this could be the sequence: Germany Soviet Union Japan US UK Italy ANZAC France China. (Edited 5:47)

User avatar
Imperious leader
Posts: 5207
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:04 am
Location: Moving up to phase line red...

Re: Alpha +3

Post by Imperious leader » Mon Oct 03, 2011 3:32 pm

This definitely brings back the can opener troubles in the Pacific. Larry, what about my proposal:

Germany
Soviet Union
Japan
US
China
Italy
UK
ANZAC
France

No can opener troubles, and at most we have a 3 turn block of UK/ANZAC/France which isn't a bad thing.
Be careful. larry hates Italy before UK

No it's not Italy before UK that I hate... Knock it off IL... Don't ever intentionally try to misrepresent my position. I think I have been very clear with you and don't care much for your little games.
Let me put this to you as gently as I can... Stop pushing the "Italy before the UK" nonsense will you please. This issue has been explored and rejected - as you very well know. If your intent is to undermine these efforts I will not tolerate it.
Last edited by Imperious leader on Mon Oct 03, 2011 3:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.
We really need an Axis and Allies World War one game so i can play that on August 1st, 2014.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests